Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Background: We aimed to investigate the characteristics of pediatric ulcerative colitis (UC) at diagnosis in Korea. Methods: This was a multicenter, registry-based, inception cohort study conducted in Korea between 2021 and 2023. Children and adolescents newly diagnosed with UC < 18 years were included. Baseline clinicodemographics, results from laboratory, endoscopic exams, and Paris classification factors were collected, and associations between factors at diagnosis were investigated. Results: A total 205 patients with UC were included. Male-to-female ratio was 1.59:1, and the median age at diagnosis was 14.7 years (interquartile range 11.9–16.2). Disease extent of E1 comprised 12.2% (25/205), E2 24.9% (51/205), E3 11.2% (23/205), and E4 51.7% (106/205) of the patients. S1 comprised 13.7% (28/205) of the patients. The proportion of patients with a disease severity of S1 was significantly higher in patients with E4 compared to the other groups (E1: 0% vs. E2: 2% vs. E3: 0% vs. E4: 24.5%, P < 0.001). Significant differences between disease extent groups were also observed in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (median 25 vs. 35 vs. 40 vs. 45, respectively, P < 0.001), hemoglobin (median 13.5 vs.13.2 vs. 11.6 vs. 11.4 g/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), platelet count (median 301 vs. 324 vs. 372 vs. 377 × 103 /μL, respectively, P = 0.001), C-reactive protein (median 0.05 vs. 0.10 vs. 0.17 vs. 0.38 mg/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (median 4 vs. 4 vs. 4 vs. 5, respectively, P = 0.006). No significant differences were observed in factors between groups divided according to sex and diagnosis age. Conclusion This study represents the largest multicenter pediatric inflammatory bowel disease cohort in Korea. Disease severity was associated with disease extent in pediatric patients with UC at diagnosis.

Background: We aimed to investigate the characteristics of pediatric ulcerative colitis (UC) at diagnosis in Korea. Methods: This was a multicenter, registry-based, inception cohort study conducted in Korea between 2021 and 2023. Children and adolescents newly diagnosed with UC < 18 years were included. Baseline clinicodemographics, results from laboratory, endoscopic exams, and Paris classification factors were collected, and associations between factors at diagnosis were investigated. Results: A total 205 patients with UC were included. Male-to-female ratio was 1.59:1, and the median age at diagnosis was 14.7 years (interquartile range 11.9–16.2). Disease extent of E1 comprised 12.2% (25/205), E2 24.9% (51/205), E3 11.2% (23/205), and E4 51.7% (106/205) of the patients. S1 comprised 13.7% (28/205) of the patients. The proportion of patients with a disease severity of S1 was significantly higher in patients with E4 compared to the other groups (E1: 0% vs. E2: 2% vs. E3: 0% vs. E4: 24.5%, P < 0.001). Significant differences between disease extent groups were also observed in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (median 25 vs. 35 vs. 40 vs. 45, respectively, P < 0.001), hemoglobin (median 13.5 vs.13.2 vs. 11.6 vs. 11.4 g/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), platelet count (median 301 vs. 324 vs. 372 vs. 377 × 103 /μL, respectively, P = 0.001), C-reactive protein (median 0.05 vs. 0.10 vs. 0.17 vs. 0.38 mg/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (median 4 vs. 4 vs. 4 vs. 5, respectively, P = 0.006). No significant differences were observed in factors between groups divided according to sex and diagnosis age. Conclusion This study represents the largest multicenter pediatric inflammatory bowel disease cohort in Korea. Disease severity was associated with disease extent in pediatric patients with UC at diagnosis.

Background: We aimed to investigate the characteristics of pediatric ulcerative colitis (UC) at diagnosis in Korea. Methods: This was a multicenter, registry-based, inception cohort study conducted in Korea between 2021 and 2023. Children and adolescents newly diagnosed with UC < 18 years were included. Baseline clinicodemographics, results from laboratory, endoscopic exams, and Paris classification factors were collected, and associations between factors at diagnosis were investigated. Results: A total 205 patients with UC were included. Male-to-female ratio was 1.59:1, and the median age at diagnosis was 14.7 years (interquartile range 11.9–16.2). Disease extent of E1 comprised 12.2% (25/205), E2 24.9% (51/205), E3 11.2% (23/205), and E4 51.7% (106/205) of the patients. S1 comprised 13.7% (28/205) of the patients. The proportion of patients with a disease severity of S1 was significantly higher in patients with E4 compared to the other groups (E1: 0% vs. E2: 2% vs. E3: 0% vs. E4: 24.5%, P < 0.001). Significant differences between disease extent groups were also observed in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (median 25 vs. 35 vs. 40 vs. 45, respectively, P < 0.001), hemoglobin (median 13.5 vs.13.2 vs. 11.6 vs. 11.4 g/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), platelet count (median 301 vs. 324 vs. 372 vs. 377 × 103 /μL, respectively, P = 0.001), C-reactive protein (median 0.05 vs. 0.10 vs. 0.17 vs. 0.38 mg/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (median 4 vs. 4 vs. 4 vs. 5, respectively, P = 0.006). No significant differences were observed in factors between groups divided according to sex and diagnosis age. Conclusion This study represents the largest multicenter pediatric inflammatory bowel disease cohort in Korea. Disease severity was associated with disease extent in pediatric patients with UC at diagnosis.

Background: We aimed to investigate the characteristics of pediatric ulcerative colitis (UC) at diagnosis in Korea. Methods: This was a multicenter, registry-based, inception cohort study conducted in Korea between 2021 and 2023. Children and adolescents newly diagnosed with UC < 18 years were included. Baseline clinicodemographics, results from laboratory, endoscopic exams, and Paris classification factors were collected, and associations between factors at diagnosis were investigated. Results: A total 205 patients with UC were included. Male-to-female ratio was 1.59:1, and the median age at diagnosis was 14.7 years (interquartile range 11.9–16.2). Disease extent of E1 comprised 12.2% (25/205), E2 24.9% (51/205), E3 11.2% (23/205), and E4 51.7% (106/205) of the patients. S1 comprised 13.7% (28/205) of the patients. The proportion of patients with a disease severity of S1 was significantly higher in patients with E4 compared to the other groups (E1: 0% vs. E2: 2% vs. E3: 0% vs. E4: 24.5%, P < 0.001). Significant differences between disease extent groups were also observed in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (median 25 vs. 35 vs. 40 vs. 45, respectively, P < 0.001), hemoglobin (median 13.5 vs.13.2 vs. 11.6 vs. 11.4 g/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), platelet count (median 301 vs. 324 vs. 372 vs. 377 × 103 /μL, respectively, P = 0.001), C-reactive protein (median 0.05 vs. 0.10 vs. 0.17 vs. 0.38 mg/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (median 4 vs. 4 vs. 4 vs. 5, respectively, P = 0.006). No significant differences were observed in factors between groups divided according to sex and diagnosis age. Conclusion This study represents the largest multicenter pediatric inflammatory bowel disease cohort in Korea. Disease severity was associated with disease extent in pediatric patients with UC at diagnosis.

Background: Worldwide, sepsis is the leading cause of death in hospitals. If mortality rates in patients with sepsis can be predicted early, medical resources can be allocated efficiently. We constructed machine learning (ML) models to predict the mortality of patients with sepsis in a hospital emergency department. Methods: This study prospectively collected nationwide data from an ongoing multicenter cohort of patients with sepsis identified in the emergency department. Patients were enrolled from 19 hospitals between September 2019 and December 2020. For acquired data from 3,657 survivors and 1,455 deaths, six ML models (logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, extreme gradient boosting [XGBoost], light gradient boosting machine, and categorical boosting [CatBoost]) were constructed using fivefold cross-validation to predict mortality. Through these models, 44 clinical variables measured on the day of admission were compared with six sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) components (PaO 2 /FIO 2 [PF], platelets (PLT), bilirubin, cardiovascular, Glasgow Coma Scale score, and creatinine).The confidence interval (CI) was obtained by performing 10,000 repeated measurements via random sampling of the test dataset. All results were explained and interpreted using Shapley’s additive explanations (SHAP). Results: Of the 5,112 participants, CatBoost exhibited the highest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.800 (95% CI, 0.756–0.840) using clinical variables. Using the SOFA components for the same patient, XGBoost exhibited the highest AUC of 0.678 (95% CI, 0.626–0.730). As interpreted by SHAP, albumin, lactate, blood urea nitrogen, and international normalization ratio were determined to significantly affect the results. Additionally, PF and PLTs in the SOFA component significantly influenced the prediction results. Conclusion Newly established ML-based models achieved good prediction of mortality in patients with sepsis. Using several clinical variables acquired at the baseline can provide more accurate results for early predictions than using SOFA components. Additionally, the impact of each variable was identified.

Despite the availability of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in Korea, need remains for pangenotypic regimens that can be used in the presence of hepatic impairment, comorbidities, or prior treatment failure. We investigated the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir–velpatasvir and sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir for 12 weeks in HCV-infected Korean adults. Methods: This Phase 3b, multicenter, open-label study included 2 cohorts. In Cohort 1, participants with HCV genotype 1 or 2 and who were treatment-naive or treatment-experienced with interferon-based treatments, received sofosbuvir–velpatasvir 400/100 mg/day. In Cohort 2, HCV genotype 1 infected individuals who previously received an NS5A inhibitor-containing regimen ≥ 4 weeks received sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir 400/100/100 mg/day. Decompensated cirrhosis was an exclusion criterion. The primary endpoint was SVR12, defined as HCV RNA < 15 IU/mL 12 weeks following treatment. Results: Of 53 participants receiving sofosbuvir–velpatasvir, 52 (98.1%) achieved SVR12. The single participant who did not achieve SVR12 experienced an asymptomatic Grade 3 ASL/ALT elevation on day 15 and discontinued treatment. The event resolved without intervention. All 33 participants (100%) treated with sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir achieved SVR 12. Overall, sofosbuvir–velpatasvir and sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir were safe and well tolerated. Three participants (5.6%) in Cohort 1 and 1 participant (3.0%) in Cohort 2 had serious adverse events, but none were considered treatment-related. No deaths or grade 4 laboratory abnormalities were reported. Conclusions: Treatment with sofosbuvir–velpatasvir or sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir was safe and resulted in high SVR12 rates in Korean HCV patients.

Objective: This study enrolls diverse hospitals and analyzes the differences in meal provision and nutrition management services for patients with dysphagia. Methods: A nationwide survey was conducted by mail and mobile for 850 medical institutions, and data were collected from 217 hospitals. We analyzed the status of the dysphagia diet and nutrition management by considering the type of hospital. Results: Among the hospitals surveyed, 167 (77%) provided texture-modified diets for dysphagia patients. The status of providing dysphagia diets and nutrition management for dysphagia differed depending on the institution. In particular, nutrition services for dysphagia patients in long-term care hospitals were poor. Difficulties in providing a dysphagia diet included the complexity of the cooking process, difficulty maintaining constant viscosity, difficulty in hygiene management, and low meal bills. Using commercial thickeners in cooking accounted for 72.5%, and only 41.9% of hospitals provided a commercial thickener with meals. Compared to the regular diet, the additional food cost to provide a single dysphagia diet meal was estimated to be 500-1,000 won. Based on a 5-point scale, we determined that the average scores for the importance and performance of nutrition management in patients with dysphagia were 4.29 and 3.19 points, respectively. Regardless of the type of hospital, performances of all the steps in the nutrition care process were significantly lower than their importance. Conclusion Several difficulties are encountered in meal provision and nutrition management for patients with dysphagia, including the burden of expenses and human resources. Thus, the medical fees for a dysphagia diet need to be reasonably increased. Moreover, national health insurance should additionally cover nutrition education for dysphagia patients.